Stop saying I should get a semi auto, I love my revolvers!

Status
Not open for further replies.
If I can't do it with nine rounds of .45 ACP Ranger SXTs in the gun, and eight more in a spare mag, I think it's just my time.

And hell, the Ladyfriend carries one of them new fangled M&P Compact 9mms, so she'd better be in the fight too.

That being said, Leslie Coffelt did it in one shot. With a .38 Special.
 
Anyway I guess the whole point is if u carry a semi auto dont look down on us wheel gun guys like we dont have enough gun to get the job done. Shoot whatever u like and be happy with it and allow the next man to do the same .
Click to expand...

Ok. I carry a semi-auto. I really don't care what others carry. At least one revolver (on my to-buy list) has as much firepower as most full-size semi-autos and even more firepower than my little DB9 that I carry: S&W 627 - 8 rounds of .357 in a relatively compact (2.6" barrel) revolver. A little chunky, but compact for what it is.....would make a nice BBQ gun too!
 
I think NASCAR fans like Smith & Wesson revolvers, because the cylinder turns counter clockwise!

I just got back from my LGS where I bought my wife a S&W Model 642 Lady Smith.
Now she can give me back my Model 637 so I can carry it instead of my square butt blued model 36, or square butt nickel model 37. I'd rather not put the holster wear on them if I can help it.

90% of the time I carry a J frame OWB, with a LCP bug. The other 10% of the time is with a semi auto, usually a LC9, or one of my 1911"s.
 
You're carrying too many rounds, you need a double barrel derringer. :)

You need to make your selection based on your criteria and opinions, there is no need to justify it to anyone else.

I always say..If 'ya can't gett 'er done in 6, 'ya better practice a bunch!

This spray-n-pray mentality with 15 or more rounds is not for me.
Click to expand...

Who says that you HAVE TO spray and pray with an auto or that you CAN'T with a revolver?
 
JN01 Im guessing the assumption comes from people saying I need a semi auto because of its higher capacity. I mean if you arent in a war zone or LEO why is it such a must to carry 30plus rounds? Like most people said before me it doesnt matter what the next man is carrying but I hear it from people.

Then you get the FBI reports of 20% of hitting ones target. Which IMO isnt what you face in a SD siituation. These situarions are normally shootouts, guys ducking behind cars, or houses. Firing back n forth. SD is up close n personal with few rounds fired. Normally the BG is only a few feet away from u. With the intent of taking on a easy target. These are diffent then the situations a LEO will face for the most part but these are juat my thoughts. Hopefully I wont have to worry about it but if I am walking the streets, there will be a wheelgun on the hip. At home I have a Benelli nova tactical for that.
 
I don't take issue with the statistics regarding the number of rounds likely to be fired, but with the cliche that anyone who carries a high capacity gun is going to irresponsibly blaze away while anyone with a six shooter is a dead eye marksman who is going to carefully take aim every time.

It depends on the shooter, not the hardware.
 
If you shoot more than 3 or 4 rounds you could be exposing yourself to prosecution, or at least a civil suit for using it as an offensive weapon instead of a defensive one. It's also very irresponsible to, "spray and pray."

For the tiny chance that I would have to use a firearm in self defense, and the even tinier chance that I would need more than 3 rounds, I feel that my little 5-shot J-frame is more than adequate.
 
Posted by Axelwik:
If you shoot more than 3 or 4 rounds you could be exposing yourself to prosecution, or at least a civil suit for using it as an offensive weapon instead of a defensive one.
Click to expand...
Do you have a supportable basis for that assertion?

Have you ever availed our self of any defensive use of force training?

Have you ever attended a course on the subject of use of force law?

For the tiny chance that I would have to use a firearm in self defense, and the even tinier chance that I would need more than 3 rounds, I feel that my little 5-shot J-frame is more than adequate.
Click to expand...
The chance that one may need to use a firearm will become completely irrelevant should that need ever materialize; most objective analysis indicates that the potential for needing more than three rounds in a defensive encounter is not "tiny"; and in the event, what one may have "felt" beforehand is completely without meaning.
 
Old... you shouldn't take yourself so seriously. I was stating my opinion, nothing more.

But I could certainly see a prosecutor, especially in an anti-gun state, making a case over someone emptying a few 15-round magazines in a public place.
 
George Zimmerman fired a single shot after being pummeled for more than 40 seconds, and he was prosecuted and persecuted. Just drawing your weapon can get you prosecuted, so doing so should pretty much be a measure of last resort.
 
George Zimmerman fired a single shot after being pummeled for more than 40 seconds, and he was prosecuted and persecuted. Just drawing your weapon can get you prosecuted, so doing so should pretty much be a measure of last resort.
Click to expand...


Zimmerman? Really? He was lucky to have avoided prosecution in that case and since then he's been arrested a few times. If nothing else can we agree to pick a better representative?
 
^Zimmerman did not avoid prosecution. He was prosecuted to the full extent of a corrupt special prosecutor's abused authority, and he was viciously persecuted by the media and the US Dept. of Justice.

George is obviously not the sharpest tack on the bulletin board, but even folks with two-digit IQs have the natural right to self defense. In a nation of laws, which the US used to be, it doesn't matter if one is bright or likeable -- we're all supposed to have the law applied equally.

Nice red herring tactic by mentioning his unrelated arrests, some of which amounted to naught. If Barack had a son he would argue like you.
 
I think some folks think they live in a war zone and wouldn't feel comfortable carrying anything less than 15 rounds, half dozen clips, two ammo bearers, and a partridge in a pear tree? *snickers* To each their own I guess. Myself, if I ever need more than a couple of shots then I wasn't paying enough attention to my surroundings, to "get outta Dodge" in the first place.

My personal opinion on George Zimmerman is that both he and the thug he shot were looking for trouble. It is a shame that fate placed them together.
 
Posted by campingnights:
Myself, if I ever need more than a couple of shots then I wasn't paying enough attention to my surroundings, to "get outta Dodge" in the first place.
Click to expand...
If you ever have to draw a firearm, something has gone very wrong. Your situational awareness and avoidance strategy have failed.

But if you ever do, you may have to fire.

And if you do have to fire, there will be several unknowns:
  • Will an assailant be stopped simply by the realization that he has been shot (tthe proverbial "psychological stop"), or will it be necessary to injure him seriously to stop him?
  • In the event of the latter, how many shots will it take to do that (remembering that the defender will likely not have time to strive for any real precision, and that the vital areas of the body are small and are hidden within the body anyway)?

The fact that most trainers teach their students to fire several shots very rapidly would indicate that "a couple of shots" may well be below the low end of the realistic spectrum--many people are trained to shoot four or five shots in very rapid succession, and for very good reason.
 
Posted by campingnights:
Quote:
Myself, if I ever need more than a couple of shots then I wasn't paying enough attention to my surroundings, to "get outta Dodge" in the first place.
Click to expand...

Posted by OldMarksman: If you ever have to draw a firearm, something has gone very wrong. Your situational awareness and avoidance strategy have failed.

But if you ever do, you may have to fire.

And if you do have to fire, there will be several unknowns:
Will an assailant be stopped simply by the realization that he has been shot (tthe proverbial "psychological stop"), or will it be necessary to injure him seriously to stop him?
In the event of the latter, how many shots will it take to do that (remembering that the defender will likely not have time to strive for any real precision, and that the vital areas of the body are small and are hidden within the body anyway)?

The fact that most trainers teach their students to fire several shots very rapidly would indicate that "a couple of shots" may well be below the low end of the realistic spectrum--many people are trained to shoot four or five shots in very rapid succession, and for very good reason.
Click to expand...

Hear, hear! I love reading good commonsense comments, like those of OldMarksman above.
 
Last edited:
The fact that most trainers teach their students to fire several shots very rapidly would indicate that "a couple of shots" may well be below the low end of the realistic spectrum--many people are trained to shoot four or five shots in very rapid succession, and for very good reason.
Click to expand...

I think many so called "trainers" are either ill informed or misinformed. Sometimes less is more. Several shots is why many bystanders are killed or injured because the "trained" shooters rush their shots without aiming. I think it is more like learning to shoot with a single shot 22. You are much more careful to make sure you shoot accurately when you can't shoot several more quickly. You will be much more careful with your shots if you have 6 rounds than when you have 16 rounds. Look at your own habits. I waste a lot more ammo with my semi-automatic with 16 rounds than I do with my 6 shot revolver. I also have a higher percentage on target with the revolver (and it is not due to the gun but it is because of my being more careful).
 
My personal opinion on George Zimmerman is that both he and the thug he shot were looking for trouble. It is a shame that fate placed them together.
Click to expand...

Ahh ... an advocate of the Safari Principle: http://theconservativetreehouse.com...hasize-political-correctness-while-on-safari/. An overtly racist principle, but one that serves the goals of modern liberal-progressivism. I do have a hard time thinking that Zimmerman was on safari in his own community, though.

By the way, do you have a scintilla of evidence supporting your allegation?

If one believes in the natural right of self defense by use of deadly force when necessary, the outcome of such an incident must be viewed as being a net good from both the individual's and society's perspectives -- there is nothing shameful in a legitimate act of self defense; in fact, it should be praised and celebrated.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top